Author: Zhang Feng

Blockchain technology, with its characteristics of decentralization, immutability, and open transparency, is reshaping the global financial and trust systems. However, this "permissionless" freedom also brings significant challenges in regulation and compliance. Risks such as money laundering, terrorist financing, and transactions involving sanctioned entities hang over the entire industry like the sword of Damocles. How to introduce the compliance framework of the traditional world onto the blockchain without stifling innovation and openness has become a key issue for blockchain to go mainstream. "On-chain compliance" has thus emerged, and with collaborations from industry giants like Chainlink and Chainalysis, it is moving towards a new era of "programmable compliance automation."

I. On-chain Compliance: A Paradigm Shift from "Post-Event Investigation" to "In-Process Interception"

On-chain compliance, in simple terms, is embedding compliance rules and logic into the lifecycle of blockchain transactions in the form of code, allowing for automatic compliance checks to be executed before or during the transaction, rather than relying solely on post-transaction judicial tracing.

Traditional financial compliance relies on centralized institutions (such as banks and payment companies) to conduct KYC (Know Your Customer), AML (Anti-Money Laundering), and sanctions list screening in the background. This system faces failure in the on-chain world: blockchain addresses have pseudo-anonymity, transactions are globally fluid and instantaneous, and there is no single gatekeeper. Therefore, early on-chain compliance largely depended on "post-event" analysis tools provided by blockchain analytics companies like Chainalysis and Elliptic, which law enforcement and exchanges used to track illegal fund flows, but this is akin to "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted."

True on-chain compliance aims to achieve "prevention" and "interception". The core idea is to transform compliance logic into a "state" that can be read and executed by smart contracts. For example, a decentralized finance protocol can automatically check whether a user's wallet address is associated with known illegal addresses before the user executes a transaction, and based on the query results, automatically decide whether to allow or reject the transaction. This not only moves the compliance check forward but also transforms it from a labor-intensive, report-driven process into a real-time, automated, programmable infrastructure.

II. Industry Status: Fragmented Efforts and Centralized Bottlenecks

Before the collaboration between Chainlink and Chainalysis emerged, the industry's attempts at on-chain compliance were fragmented.

Gatekeeper Role of Centralized Exchanges: Currently, the primary compliance pressure is borne by centralized exchanges. They strictly enforce KYC and AML within their platforms, acting as the main gatekeepers connecting the fiat world and the crypto world. However, this compliance is limited to their centralized walls; once assets are transferred to on-chain DeFi protocols, their control significantly weakens.

Self-Regulatory Attempts by DeFi Protocols: Some DeFi protocols attempt to integrate simple compliance tools, such as using publicly available address blacklists. However, this approach often suffers from issues like delayed data updates, limited coverage, and potential circumvention (e.g., through mixers). More importantly, protocol developers are not compliance experts, and maintaining a global, dynamic compliance database independently is neither realistic nor carries significant responsibility.

Isolated Application of Analytical Tools: Tools like the API provided by Chainalysis, while powerful, require proactive integration by project teams into their centralized backend systems. This leads to several issues: first, the integration work is complex and non-standard; second, the execution of compliance logic still relies on the project's centralized servers, failing to be fully on-chain, resulting in insufficient transparency and automation; third, for completely decentralized protocols, there is no clear "entity" responsible for calling these APIs.

These efforts, while beneficial, have not formed a standardized, automated, and universally applicable solution that can interact natively with smart contracts. On-chain compliance needs an infrastructure akin to an electrical grid, allowing any DeFi application to be "plug-and-play."

III. Building On-chain Compliance Automation Infrastructure: Taking the Chainlink and Chainalysis Collaboration as an Example

The collaboration between Chainlink (an oracle network) and Chainalysis (a leading blockchain data analytics firm) aims to build the aforementioned infrastructure. This solution cleverly combines Chainalysis's world-class compliance data with Chainlink's ability to connect the off-chain world with the on-chain world.

The core architecture of the solution includes data sources, transmission layers, and on-chain interfaces.

Data Source: Chainalysis Orion: Chainalysis provides data from its "Orion" tool, which is a database containing millions of addresses associated with illegal activities, along with risk scores. This data is a core asset developed over years of service to government agencies and financial institutions, covering various risk categories such as sanctions, hacking, fraud, and dark web markets.

Transmission Layer: Chainlink Oracles: Chainlink's decentralized oracle network is responsible for transmitting Chainalysis's compliance data (such as the risk score of a specific address) to multiple blockchains (like Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, etc.) in a verifiable and tamper-proof manner.

On-chain Interface: Compliance Status Feed: The data transmitted to the blockchain is structured as a "compliance status feed" that is easy for smart contracts to query. In simple terms, it acts like a continuously updated "compliance list" or "risk score table" on-chain, which any smart contract can query the status of an address through standard function calls.

The operational process generally includes protocol integration, user transaction initiation, automatic compliance checks, oracle responses, and conditional execution.

Assuming a decentralized lending protocol Aave wishes to integrate this compliance solution, its operational process would be as follows:

Step 1: Protocol Integration. Aave's smart contract is upgraded to include a query call to the Chainlink compliance feed in the key functions where users perform deposit or borrowing actions.

Step 2: User Initiates Transaction. User Alice attempts to deposit 10 ETH on Aave to borrow USDT.

Step 3: Automatic Compliance Check. Before the transaction enters the memory pool but has not yet been packaged on-chain, Aave's smart contract automatically sends a request to the Chainlink compliance feed: "Query the risk score of address Alice."

Step 4: Oracle Response. The Chainlink oracle network receives the request, retrieves the latest risk score for Alice's address from the Chainalysis Orion database, signs it, and sends it back on-chain.

Step 5: Conditional Execution. Aave's smart contract receives the response. If the score indicates "low risk," the transaction proceeds normally; if it shows "high risk" (for example, if the address is flagged as related to a sanctioned entity), the smart contract will automatically roll back the transaction and inform the user that "the transaction was rejected for compliance reasons." The entire process is completed automatically within seconds, without any human intervention.

IV. The Solution Meets Precise, Dynamic, and Auditable Compliance Requirements

This automated solution meets the increasingly stringent global compliance requirements from multiple dimensions.

Meets OFAC and Other Sanction Requirements: The sanctions list from the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control is a rule that the global financial system must adhere to. This solution ensures that DeFi protocols automatically reject transactions involving addresses related to the SDN list, directly fulfilling OFAC's core compliance requirements and avoiding potential legal risks for the protocol and its users.

Achieves Dynamic Risk Monitoring: Unlike traditional one-time KYC, the risk associated with on-chain addresses is dynamically changing. An address that is clean today may become "dirty" tomorrow if it receives stolen funds. Chainalysis's data is continuously updated and synchronized to the blockchain in near real-time through Chainlink oracles, achieving dynamic and continuous risk monitoring that far exceeds the capabilities of static lists.

Enhances Transparency and Auditability: All compliance check logic and results are recorded on the blockchain and are publicly accessible. Regulatory agencies can clearly trace the decision-making process behind any rejected transaction, verifying whether the protocol indeed executed compliance rules. This "verifiable compliance" provides unprecedented transparency for regulators.

Clarifies Responsibility Boundaries: For DeFi protocol developers and managing DAOs, this solution provides a standardized tool to fulfill their compliance obligations. By integrating this infrastructure, they can clearly demonstrate that they have taken "reasonable measures" to prevent illegal activities, building a strong legal defense.

V. Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration in Technology, Industry, and Law

Achieving such complex on-chain compliance automation is not something that can be accomplished by experts in a single field; it requires deep and seamless collaboration among technology experts, industry experts, and legal experts.

Role of Technology Experts (Chainlink/Smart Contract Developers): Their core task is to ensure the reliability, security, and decentralization of the system. This includes designing a robust oracle network to ensure tamper-proof and highly available data delivery; writing rigorously audited smart contract code to ensure compliance logic is executed accurately; and considering how to minimize gas consumption and avoid network congestion. They are the "engineers" of the rules, responsible for translating abstract logic into indisputable code.

Role of Industry Experts (Chainalysis/Compliance Officers): They are the "definers" of compliance rules and "guardians" of data. Their responsibilities include: leveraging their extensive investigative experience and global intelligence network to continuously maintain and update the risk database, ensuring its accuracy, timeliness, and global coverage; communicating with regulatory agencies to understand policy trends and translating complex legal texts into machine-readable risk labels and rules. They need to find a precise balance between "over-blocking" and "insufficient prevention."

Role of Legal Experts (Lawyers/Scholars/Regulators): They are the "architects" of the compliance framework and "arbitrators" of disputes. In the early stages of solution design, lawyers need to provide legal opinions on the boundaries of "code as law," such as whether automatically rejecting transactions constitutes discrimination or unfairness. How to address potential false positives? In the event of disputes, legal experts need to interpret on-chain records and assess the liability of the protocol parties. More importantly, they need to promote new legal interpretations and regulatory guidelines that recognize the legal validity of this programmable compliance automation, providing it with "juridical legitimacy."

These three parties form a continuous feedback loop, where legal experts propose requirements, industry experts quantify them into rules, and technology experts encode the rules into implementation. At the same time, new issues encountered in technical implementation (such as false positives) require collaborative discussions between industry and legal experts to resolve. This is a dynamic, co-evolving process.

VI. Lawyers Transitioning from Document Crafters to Technical Architects

The new on-chain compliance automation is profoundly reshaping the legal profession, placing unprecedented high demands on lawyers, especially those focused on fintech and blockchain.

Understanding Technical Principles, Becoming a "Bilingual": Future lawyers can no longer stop at legal texts. They must be able to understand the basic principles of smart contracts, oracles, and public-private key cryptography to effectively communicate with developers, assess the technical feasibility of compliance solutions, and make strong presentations and defenses on technical issues in court. They need to become bilingual talents proficient in both "legal language" and "technical language."

Participating in Compliance Product Design, Becoming a "Rule Designer": The role of lawyers will extend from litigation and contract review to participating in the design of compliance infrastructure. They need to think about: how to transform vague legal principles (such as "reasonable suspicion") into precise, executable code logic? At which stage of the transaction process should compliance rules be set? These design decisions will directly impact the legality and operational risks of the protocol.

Mastering On-chain Evidence Collection Skills, Becoming a "Digital Detective": The blockchain itself is a complete audit trail. Lawyers need to master the ability to use blockchain explorers and analytical tools for on-chain evidence collection. When compliance disputes arise, they need to independently trace the flow of funds and interpret the transaction logs of smart contracts to build a chain of evidence. This requires them to possess the skills of a digital investigator.

Embracing Interdisciplinary Collaboration, Becoming a "Bridge": The most successful blockchain lawyers will be those who can seamlessly navigate between technical teams, project parties, regulatory agencies, and users, accurately conveying information and resolving misunderstandings. They need to have the unique ability to translate technical risks into legal language while converting legal requirements into technical specifications.

The collaboration between Chainlink and Chainalysis marks the evolution of on-chain compliance from a passive, peripheral, workshop-style practice to an active, embedded, industrialized infrastructure. We are witnessing the dawn of the "programmable compliance" era, where compliance is no longer just a cost center and legal burden, but can be transformed into a composable, tradable on-chain service, becoming the core engine driving the safe and compliant growth of the next generation of DeFi applications.

However, this path remains fraught with challenges. The accuracy of data, the balance of privacy protection, the maintenance of the spirit of decentralization, and the lack of uniform global regulatory standards are all issues that need to be continuously addressed. Undoubtedly, a grand experiment led by technology experts, industry experts, and legal experts regarding the governance rules of the future digital world has already begun. In this process, lawyers who can actively embrace change and continuously learn and evolve will not only be present but will also become a key force in shaping new rules and building a new order.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。